ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2014
Accessing biomedical literature in the current information landscape.
Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Genetic Susceptibility to Drug Teratogenicity: A Systematic Literature Review.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Pooled it
- CarD-T: an automated pipeline for the nomination and analysis of potential human carcinogens.Carcinogenesis · 2025Article
- Clinician Attitudes and Perceptions of Point-of-Care Information Resources and Their Integration Into Electronic Health Records: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR medical informatics · 2025Article
- CarD-T: Interpreting Carcinomic Lexicon via Transformers.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- VarChat: the generative AI assistant for the interpretation of human genomic variations.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2024Article
- Conceptual framework for preterm birth review in San Francisco.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
- DrugShot: querying biomedical search terms to retrieve prioritized lists of small molecules.BMC bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Proliferation and Apoptosis Pathways and Factors in Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Using variation between countries to estimate demand for Cochrane reviews when access is free: a cost-benefit analysis.BMJ open · 2021Article
- LitSuggest: a web-based system for literature recommendation and curation using machine learning.Nucleic acids research · 2021Article
- NLM-Gene, a richly annotated gold standard dataset for gene entities that addresses ambiguity and multi-species gene recognition.Journal of biomedical informatics · 2021Article
- The WNT/β-catenin dependent transcription: A tissue-specific business.WIREs mechanisms of disease · 2021Review
- HLBS-PopOmics: an online knowledge base to accelerate dissemination and implementation of research advances in population genomics to reduce the burden of heart, lung, blood, and sleep disorders.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2019Review
- Analyzing a co-occurrence gene-interaction network to identify disease-gene association.BMC bioinformatics · 2019Article
- LitVar: a semantic search engine for linking genomic variant data in PubMed and PMC.Nucleic acids research · 2018Article
- Informatics Support for Basic Research in Biomedicine.ILAR journal · 2017Review
- Abstract Sifter: a comprehensive front-end system to PubMed.F1000Research · 2017Article
- A semantic-based workflow for biomedical literature annotation.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2017Article
- Crowdsourcing in biomedicine: challenges and opportunities.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2016Review
- PubMedPortable: A Framework for Supporting the Development of Text Mining Applications.PloS one · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Biomedical and life sciences literature is unique because of its exponentially increasing volume and interdisciplinary nature. Biomedical literature access is essential for several types of users including biomedical researchers, clinicians, database curators, and bibliometricians. In the past few decades, several online search tools and literature archives, generic as well as biomedicine specific, have been developed. We present this chapter in the light of three consecutive steps of literature access: searching for citations, retrieving full text, and viewing the article. The first section presents the current state of practice of biomedical literature access, including an analysis of the search tools most frequently used by the users, including PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase, and a study on biomedical literature archives such as PubMed Central. The next section describes current research and the state-of-the-art systems motivated by the challenges a user faces during query formulation and interpretation of search results. The research solutions are classified into five key areas related to text and data mining, text similarity search, semantic search, query support, relevance ranking, and clustering results. Finally, the last section describes some predicted future trends for improving biomedical literature access, such as searching and reading articles on portable devices, and adoption of the open access policy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.